Ben Brereton Diaz

[Darrenbot]

Just now, J*B said:

No, we wouldn’t. If he signs a pre contract deal with Seville, let’s say, on January 1st 2023, he’s going for free in July regardless of whatever bids we receive. He decides where he moves and once he’s signed a pre contract he’s going. 

If he won't sign a new contract then he has to be sold by the end of the summer,can't risk him signing a pre contract  on jan 23 and leaving for nothing.All this could be probably sorted out by us miraculously winning promotion as i'm guessing he'd sign a new contract if we were in the Prem.

[J*B]

2 minutes ago, Darrenbot said:

If he won't sign a new contract then he has to be sold by the end of the summer,can't risk him signing a pre contract  on jan 23 and leaving for nothing.All this could be probably sorted out by us miraculously winning promotion as i'm guessing he'd sign a new contract if we were in the Prem.

Agreed, if he hasn’t signed by the end of the season he needs to be sold to the highest bidder very very early in the summer window. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

15 minutes ago, J*B said:

No, we wouldn’t. If he signs a pre contract deal with Seville, let’s say, on January 1st 2023, he’s going for free in July regardless of whatever bids we receive. He decides where he moves and once he’s signed a pre contract he’s going. 

As I said though, that's if he decides to go abroad. That's a huge call. Premier League his most likely destination. 

Still, need to get him on a new deal asap 

Even if it is next summer  though , it'll be around £20 million. Gonna be far more interest than there was in Armstrong 

Edited December 5, 2021 by Bigdoggsteel

[1864roverite]

He can’t sign any precontract with any club until Rovers tell him they are not exercising the 1 year extension in their favour

[47er]

10 hours ago, JBiz said:

Do you remember when the argument was “he cost 7 Million, you don’t sign for low wages with that fee…” 😂 

 

Yes but you're not proving anything wth that. What's a low wage and what's a high wage are relative things. He could still be paid a high wage relative to his team-mates but a low wage for what he's worth now. We don't know.

The question still remains, at that time in our development, could we have spent £7M better and the answer is "yes we could".

To have him for all this time and get virtually nothing from him until what I suspect is his last season does not mean this was a good buy.

Certainly not in football terms. Good for Venkys though.

[bluebruce]

14 hours ago, Crimpshrine said:

I think everyone has to admit that whoever made the initial decision to pay £7m for Brereton has been proved right. Very few people expected that and we now need to acknowledge it.

However, to make the deal a real success, we need his good form to benefit Rovers on the pitch, not on the balance sheet. Given the sale of Armstrong and the training ground, we surely have enough FFP buffer for his sale not to be a necessity. If we cashed in just to pay off some of the overdraft or to pay for some upcoming bills, I would see that as a backward step.

We have a player who is getting results for the club, raising the profile of the club and seems to be enjoying being at Rovers. I would hold on to him at all costs. It's a chance for the owners to show some ambition and interest - they could put the club's footballing interests before financial gain - they can afford it. I hope they make that choice.

It's not that simple. They have been proven right that in the long run 7 million was a fair price instead of the daylight robbery it felt like, yes. However, it took 2 years for that shift to happen. For a Prem team this would have been a great investment they could wait to pay out. But we aren't a club that can put that much into potential, or wait 2 years to get a player worth that price tag.

If this summer you told me we (still in the Championship) could spend 7 million on a new striker and they will be crap for about 18 months, ok for the next 6 and then fantastic after that (well, for a few months so far), I'd turn it down.

That's before we factor in that Forest supposedly have a sell on. It's brilliant to have the Ben Brereton we have now, I'm absolutely loving it, we all are, but we spent a lot and waited a long time for it to become reality. Meanwhile Armstrong showed the same thing (but with quicker results) can be done for 1.5 - 3 million.

[perthblue02]

Diaz mania gets stranger and stranger

https://youtu.be/pL4Xzoh-kWU?t=316

Edited December 6, 2021 by perthblue02

[chaddyrovers]

 

 

[Giant]

2 hours ago, perthblue02 said:

Diaz mania gets stranger and stranger

https://youtu.be/pL4Xzoh-kWU?t=316

If Dacky sees this, he’ll be having a field day ripping into BBD! 

[1864roverite]

And the announcement from Rovers silences some of the critics

[47er]

12 minutes ago, 1864roverite said:

And the announcement from Rovers silences some of the critics

Don't be bashful.Tell us what you're on about. Which? How? What?

[1864roverite]

Club confirmation that BBD has a contract extension in Rovers favour and that he won’t walk for nowt like some have claimed or suggested!

[chaddyrovers]

2 minutes ago, 1864roverite said:

Club confirmation that BBD has a contract extension in Rovers favour and that he won’t walk for nowt like some have claimed or suggested!

That's why I posted the LT article this morning to disapprove people worries and concerns that Brereton could walk away for nothing this summer. 

[JHRover]

On what planet do we sell him in January?

I've heard plenty of the usual talk about selling him during January to recoup as much money as possible. You don't do that if you are chasing promotion.

Can't happen. Not if the club is serious. In the summer maybe, if we get a good bid for him from a HIGHER division.

I find it bizarre - are Fulham, Bournemouth and West Brom talking about selling their best players in January during a promotion push or is that just us?

We will see what Venkys are all about in January. Will they back the club to try and be successful or will it be radio silence and a couple of loans if we are lucky? Because if they aren't going to back Mowbray in January in the position we are looking like being in given the outgoings and savings made in the summer then they never will.

[Darrenbot]

20 minutes ago, 1864roverite said:

Club confirmation that BBD has a contract extension in Rovers favour and that he won’t walk for nowt like some have claimed or suggested!

There's only one poster that i can remember saying he'll leave for nothing this summer. 

[Sparks Rover]

15 minutes ago, 1864roverite said:

Club confirmation that BBD has a contract extension in Rovers favour and that he won’t walk for nowt like some have claimed or suggested!

What are you talking about....?

Ok, if we trigger this (if it exists) there will be a massive pay rise built into the final 18 months of his contract ...the money will just go into his pocket during the next 18 months and Dack will want a pay rise et al......and we won't have a player who wants to play for us.  He's going in January.  Normally a proper run club would trigger it 18 months before the last 6 months so they have plenty of time for negotiation.......obviously with Maggot at the wheel it's been put on the back burner....should have done it in the summer when he was buzzing about the copa america 

[bluebruce]

11 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

What are you talking about....?

Ok, if we trigger this (if it exists) there will be a massive pay rise built into the final 18 months of his contract ...the money will just go into his pocket during the next 18 months and Dack will want a pay rise et al......and we won't have a player who wants to play for us.  He's going in January.  Normally a proper run club would trigger it 18 months before the last 6 months so they have plenty of time for negotiation.......obviously with Maggot at the wheel it's been put on the back burner....should have done it in the summer when he was buzzing about the copa america 

The club have confirmed it and you're still suggesting it doesn't exist? Alright there was the Chapman debacle but that was surely an aberration - even the player thought that was true. He was also a much less valuable fringe player, and reading between the lines there was probably a misinterpretation of his contract due to complacency checking the terms. I'd imagine after that, and with BB's status now, his contract has been pored over with a fine toothed comb.

You're absolutely fabricating that his extension comes with a massive pay rise, we have no idea if that is in the terms. But even if that's the case, are you seriously suggesting triggering it would be a bad thing? Compared to letting an asset worth 15 million plus go for free?

Again his contract terms may prevent the clause being triggered until a certain point, and even if they don't, there is nothing to be gained by activating it before 31st December. Players can suffer horrendous injuries or even die in freak instances, and it makes zero difference to negotiations when the agent knows the clause is there and will obviously be triggered.

As for Dack, under contract long term still, getting older, and after his two crippling injuries probably thankful for the contract he does have! Remains to be seen what player will come back and how long he will last before further injury.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

17 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

The club have confirmed it and you're still suggesting it doesn't exist? Alright there was the Chapman debacle but that was surely an aberration - even the player thought that was true. He was also a much less valuable fringe player, and reading between the lines there was probably a misinterpretation of his contract due to complacency checking the terms. I'd imagine after that, and with BB's status now, his contract has been pored over with a fine toothed comb.

You're absolutely fabricating that his extension comes with a massive pay rise, we have no idea if that is in the terms. But even if that's the case, are you seriously suggesting triggering it would be a bad thing? Compared to letting an asset worth 15 million plus go for free?

Again his contract terms may prevent the clause being triggered until a certain point, and even if they don't, there is nothing to be gained by activating it before 31st December. Players can suffer horrendous injuries or even die in freak instances, and it makes zero difference to negotiations when the agent knows the clause is there and will obviously be triggered.

As for Dack, under contract long term still, getting older, and after his two crippling injuries probably thankful for the contract he does have! Remains to be seen what player will come back and how long he will last before further injury.

I agree about Dack, he’s in no position to be asking for a rise.

Those of us with long memories remember Rovers being in a similar situation when the club sold Fred Pickering to Everton when we were up near the top of the old First Division and in with a great chance of winning it. Think Brererton x 10. That was the beginning of a long slow slide to eventual relegation.

I’m pretty sure that if we were to sell Brererton we’d see the same amount of money to spend from his transfer fee as we did from the Armstrong fee.

Edited December 6, 2021 by Tyrone Shoelaces

[Sparks Rover]

20 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

The club have confirmed it and you're still suggesting it doesn't exist? Alright there was the Chapman debacle but that was surely an aberration - even the player thought that was true. He was also a much less valuable fringe player, and reading between the lines there was probably a misinterpretation of his contract due to complacency checking the terms. I'd imagine after that, and with BB's status now, his contract has been pored over with a fine toothed comb.

You're absolutely fabricating that his extension comes with a massive pay rise, we have no idea if that is in the terms. But even if that's the case, are you seriously suggesting triggering it would be a bad thing? Compared to letting an asset worth 15 million plus go for free?

Again his contract terms may prevent the clause being triggered until a certain point, and even if they don't, there is nothing to be gained by activating it before 31st December. Players can suffer horrendous injuries or even die in freak instances, and it makes zero difference to negotiations when the agent knows the clause is there and will obviously be triggered.

As for Dack, under contract long term still, getting older, and after his two crippling injuries probably thankful for the contract he does have! Remains to be seen what player will come back and how long he will last before further injury.

I think we should keep him until summer 2023 and get the best out of him and see where we are.....any money will just disappear. That's my ideal scenario if this option exists.  I don't believe anything those two say.

Edited December 6, 2021 by Sparks Rover

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

5 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

I think we should keep him until summer 2023 and get the best out of him and see where we are.....any money will just disappear. That's my ideal scenario if this option exists.  I don't believe anything those two say.

There’s no chance we’ll keep him after this coming summer. It’ll be the Armstrong saga all over again. Just my opinion of course. I think we’ll do well to keep him beyond this transfer window to be honest.

[bluebruce]

11 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

I think we should keep him until summer 2023 and get the best out of him and see where we are.....any money will just disappear. That's my ideal scenario if this option exists.  I don't believe anything those two say.

I understand scepticism about anything the Coventrio say, but it wouldn't make any sense to be lying about this. It would be simpler for all if you either accept there's a clause, or if you can't do that, just stop saying 'if this option exists' or you'll only end up in repeated circular discussions about it.

Oh and if we can't get him to extend, I'd look to sell this summer. We might not see much returned to the playing squad but at least it would keep the lights on and FFP at bay.

Edited December 6, 2021 by bluebruce

[1864roverite]

1 hour ago, Sparks Rover said:

What are you talking about....?

Ok, if we trigger this (if it exists) there will be a massive pay rise built into the final 18 months of his contract ...the money will just go into his pocket during the next 18 months and Dack will want a pay rise et al......and we won't have a player who wants to play for us.  He's going in January.  Normally a proper run club would trigger it 18 months before the last 6 months so they have plenty of time for negotiation.......obviously with Maggot at the wheel it's been put on the back burner....should have done it in the summer when he was buzzing about the copa america 

And my friend this issue is something that you know nothing of. You cannot trigger the clause until certain aspects of the contract are fulfilled which they have and are satisfied. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

50 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

I think we should keep him until summer 2023 and get the best out of him and see where we are.....any money will just disappear. That's my ideal scenario if this option exists.  I don't believe anything those two say.

The option has been triggered

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/19763769.blackburn-rovers-transfer-news-ben-brereton-option-confirmed/ 

[rigger]

2 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

The option has been triggered

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/19763769.blackburn-rovers-transfer-news-ben-brereton-option-confirmed/ 

That article just says, that the option has been confirmed, not that it has been triggered ?

[Bigdoggsteel]

1 minute ago, rigger said:

That article just says, that the option has been confirmed, not that it has been triggered ?

All the one I would imagine